Unfortunately, and to every Patriots dismay, it is well-established by the gang of 9 in constitutional law that no rights guaranteed by the Constitution are absolute, and there have been many court decisions relating specifically to public health (many originated during the Spanish Flu epidemic) that speak directly to what is happening today.
Our right to assemble may be limited by the government, as long as the law so restricting us passes so called strict scrutiny. For that test to be passed, the government has to show that it is necessary to a "compelling state interest", it is "narrowly tailored" to achieving this interest, and uses the "least restrictive means" to do so. The courts will simply accept the premise that the government has a compelling interest in preventing the spread of the virus. Narrow tailoring and least-restrictive are not quite so clear. You could maybe take the position that the prohibition should have an exception for people who are "certifiably not exposed" (a narrower restriction), but that is probably a medical fantasy.
On the surface, suspending large assemblies seems good and absolutely prudent to limit the spread of the virus, a necessary, common sense approach to limit exposure…but to do so during an especially contentious election year (I know, when are they not contentious, but states are already postponing primaries) is troubling, a slippery slope from which we must quickly recover least it lead down a much darker path.
We can pretend that the Constitution, which was written to hold the government accountable, is still our governing document. The reality we must come to terms with, however, is that in the America we live in today, the government does whatever it wants, the Constitution and our freedom and liberty be damned. “We the people” have been terrorized, traumatized, and tricked into a semi-permanent state of compliance by a government that cares very little (if at all) for our lives or our liberties.
The bogeyman’s names and faces may change over time (terrorism, the war on drugs, illegal immigration, disease, etc.), but the end result remains the same: our unquestioning acquiescence to anything the government wants to do in exchange for some phantom-like promise of safety and security.
Thus, in the so-called name of national security and public safety, the Constitution has been steadily chipped away at, undermined, eroded, whittled down, and generally discarded to such an extent that what we are left with today is but a shadow of the robust document adopted more than two centuries ago. So called emergency declarations and other executive orders in support of them, further empower government, not the people.
Most of the damage, however, has been inflicted upon the BoR…
A recitation of the Bill of Rights—set against a backdrop of government surveillance, militarized police & SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, eminent domain, overcriminalization, surveillance drones, whole body scanners, stop and frisk searches (all sanctioned by Congress, the White House, the courts and the like)—would understandably sound more like a eulogy to freedoms lost than an affirmation of rights we truly possess.
...and I close with...when POTUS spoke the other day enacting the national emergency, he mentioned how familiar he had become with the Stafford Act and what he could do with it...and then stated that he had other "powers" that "we" (the people) had no idea of, at his disposal...a veiled threat/promise if there ever was one, and I can't help but wonder if someone at that level has already floated the term "martial law" as an option. Let vigilance be your watchword, even more so in challenging times such as these.
